Scanning and printing old BW glass plate negatives.

[Big Fish]

Greetings....

I am relatively new to photoshop and digitial photography however am familiar with photography let's say from the old school.

I am scanning old (dry) glass plate negatives from the 1890's from 4 x5 and 6 x 8 in size and reproducing them in large format ( 30 x 40) high quality sepia-toned prints. I am using an Epson 750 Pro scanner using Silverfast Ai and printing with an Epson 9880 probably using Hanhnemuhle and Crane papers. Is there any one who has specific experince of the complete process of scanning, imaging and printing old glass plates.

Many appreciations for your input.

Best Regards,

Big Fish

[Jeremy Moore]

My experience is the exact opposite of Dakotah's as I would prefer to scan a glass plate negative over a film scan any day--they are always flat!

You may run into a problem with a flatbed scanner that does not let you manually focus, though, as you will have to place the plates directly on the flatbed and the Epson 750's higher resolution lens is a few mm above the glass (to work with their film holders). I use an Epson 10000XL to scan the glass plates because it does give me the option to focus where I choose. This is from experience scanning over a thousand glass plate negs so far.

[Bjorn Nilsson]

On an Epson 750 you can put the emulsion directly on the glass. If Silverfast cannot control which scanner lens set that is in use, the Epson software can. (Set it for using "Film Guide" instead of "Film holder".) Then it will be focused on the top of the glass instead of a couple of mm above.
Unless you are going to make very large prints, the resolution of that scanner lens set is enough. The resolution of old glass plates is usually quite low anyhow.

The only problem could be that old glass plates often reach very high densities, as the processes used then called for it. Most consumer scanners of today likes negatives that are somewhat thin. You don't get more useable resolution from more expensive scanners, but a better range.

Last, shouldn't this thread be in one of the digital sub-forums?

//Björn

[Gordon Moat]

On your Epson flatbed, I am not so sure. What I do on my old Heidelberg is place the flat glass plate onto the scanner glass with some Prazio oil between the plate and scanner glass. That way I get very clean scans.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

[Big Fish]

Thanks Dakotah....

My thinking was it's always best to use a first generation negative as you can lost quality if you contact print and then scan. Not sure with new technology.

Thanks.

[Big Fish]

Hi Jeremy...

I made a similar plate holder the same thickness as Epson holders and the deatil seems OK. I've also scanned with a less thick plate holder and there is not much difference. I would rather place the plate directly on the platen.

Do you use Silverfast? Do you scan at 8 bit, 18 or in color? Do you manipulate image in imaging software or in Photoshop?

Thanks.
Big Fish

[Big Fish]

Hi Bjorn...

I have been hesitant to place plates directly of platen for fear of scrathing. I do have large format (30x40)silver gelatin prints as a baseline reference and trying to get the tonal range is a bit of an issue. I am trying different methods. The reproduced prints will be 30 x 40 and believe it's achieveable to actually make a better print. The key is the scan.
Sorry if this was in wrong forum as I am unfamiliar with forum.

[Big Fish]

Hi Gordon...

As referenced before I have hesitant to place glass on glass. How do you keep oil off emulsion side? How about KAMI fluid? Does it really make a difference using an wet or oil process? What are the trade off benefits?

Thanks,

Big Fish

[Gordon Moat]

Hi Gordon...

As referenced before I have hesitant to place glass on glass. How do you keep oil off emulsion side? How about KAMI fluid? Does it really make a difference using an wet or oil process? What are the trade off benefits?

Thanks,

Big Fish

The oil will not harm the emulsion, and it evaporates later, or you can get the film cleaner from Prazio and use that to get rid of the oil. The glass side is flatter than the emulsion side, so in theory you could scan that side, though I think you might find a focus issue on your Epson.

Kami is a competitor to Prazio. They offer very similar products, though each has a slightly different smell to it. I think Kami might be more expensive. Prazio does have a nice starter pack for new customers, which can get you going. I suggest getting Prazio Ultra Wipes too for cleaning the scanner afterwards.

Biggest trade-off is the extra time to do oil scanning compared to dry scanning. In general, the details contained in the image tend to come out better with wet mount scanning. The amount of oil used is very small, though after a while the cost of scanning adds up a little; this is somewhat helped by practice, since you learn to use less oil as you get better at this.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

[Jeremy Moore]

The glass side is flatter than the emulsion side, so in theory you could scan that side, though I think you might find a focus issue on your Epson.

Actually, that's another boon of glass negatives. The emulsion itself is enough to prevent newton rings from occurring!

I'm with everyone else that says to just slap it down on the glass, that's how I do them. There's no more risk in scratching them that way than by using a rigged holder as long as your glass is clean (which it needs to be anyway for a good scan).

These negatives were scanned at work where our workflow is different than my personal workflow as at work we only work in 8-bit grayscale/24-bit color. For what you're wanting to do I would scan them in 16-bit grayscale with the emulsion directly on the glass of the Epson scanner. Use the "film guide only" in the drop-down of the Epson software which will put the plane of focus on the glass--from tests with our Epsons (4990-750 letter size scanners) it's better to use the lower quality optics and have it in the plane of focus than to use the higher quality optics out of focus.

[Big Fish]

Greetings all on this thread....

I have seem the KAMI video/tutorials and it looks impressive. Based on our discussions I will try the wet mount process and report the results. I last question? Do I disregard the Epson wet mount holder all together? Have you used it?

Thanks again. I'll have more questions.

Big Fish

[dwross]

Hi Big Fish,

I know you've decided on the process you're going to try, but I can't resist weighing in. How you go about getting your scans will depend on two issues - the density of the individual plates and the look you're trying to achieve. I've been both collecting old plates and making my own. The really dense ones won't scan on a flatbed. Those you'll want to wet print first and then scan the resulting print. But, it's hard to get a decent wet print from a really thin plate. Those are tailor-made for flatbed scanning and Photoshop tools, although you will have a certain amount of 'scanning artifacts' if the plate is old enough to be lacking an antihalation backing. A third method, if the plate is 'just right', is simply to place it on a light table and photograph it with a good digital camera. Towards the bottom of the linked page are some examples of all of the above:
http://www.thelightfarm.com/Map/DryPlate/MapTopic.htm

Good luck. I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with.
d

[Bjorn Nilsson]

Hi Bjorn...

I have been hesitant to place plates directly of platen for fear of scrathing. I do have large format (30x40)silver gelatin prints as a baseline reference and trying to get the tonal range is a bit of an issue. I am trying different methods. The reproduced prints will be 30 x 40 and believe it's achieveable to actually make a better print. The key is the scan.
Sorry if this was in wrong forum as I am unfamiliar with forum.

Hi again!
First, the note about the "wrong" sub-forum was a "by the way". I see that you are new here, so I did answer your question first. Btw, welcome to the forum.

Just a thought about using mounting fluid: I would definitely test it first on a plate which isn't important. If the emulsion doesn't sit properly, the mounting fluid can loosen it from the plate. Also, when you mount the plate there will be a suction which will hold the plate quite firmly to the scanner glass. If you make some kind of tool with e.g. a razor blade at the top of a very small "crow bar", it should be easy to lift the plate in one corner after scanning.
I personally use a mounting station from betterscanning.com, as I so far have only scanned normal film. (This mounting station does use the dedicated scanner lens set, which focuses at 3mm or so above the glass surface.) As we are talking about wet mounting on the surface of the scanner glass, I know that there are some issues about sealing the scanner glass along the edges with the 700/750, so do check that first. (There should be a couple of web-pages and some forum threads about this, so just Google it.)

But do test without scanning fluid first. Just make and use a black paper mask to place around it. If you are satisfied with what you get, there is no reason to mess with scanning fluid. (Even though scanning fluid often gives you a little bit better results, with fewer dust specs and fewer visible small scratch marks.)

//Björn

[Big Fish]

Greetings d....

Never be afraid to jump with ideas and advice. I'am afraid your experince,ability and facilities to handle dry and wet mounting is beyond me. However, I very much appreciate you efforts and I enjoyd the viewing the work you are doing. For me scanning is the key to a great print, yet the imaging and photoshop manipulation are equally important and well as the paper selection. It's the final image that is appreciated and hopefully sold!

Take a look at AZTEK.com and view the tutorial of scanning wet plates withe the Epson 750 (with KAMI).

Thanks.

Big Fish

[Big Fish]

Hi Bjorn...

Thanks for welcome and feed back. It seems to be a great group. Isn't the internet great!!! As I mentioned to "d" above I am going to try the wet mount using the Epson wet mould holder using KAMI.(See Aztek.com and view their process). I have scanned numerous variations of the smae image as well as canned an 8 X 10 (Plus-X) copy negative of the plate. Now I will try the wet mount and make a selection. My goal is to reproduce an existing 30 x 40 size silver gelatin print I did 30 years ago. I am confident I am close. The next key is paper selection which I am narrowing down in next few weeks. I am looking at Hahnemuhle Fine Art Peart and Crane Museo Photo Silver rag.

One possible way is do a POP( pop out print) which is contact print exposed on special paper.

Best Regards,

Big Fish

[Jeremy Moore]

I would agree with Bjorn that if there is any flaking of the emulsion on the glass negatives then using oil may (I would even say probably) result in emulsion coming off of the plate.

[Howard Berg]

I have a related question on glass plate negatives. I inherited from my great grandfather a group of 5x7 glass plate negatives he made in Miami, in 1906, when there were only 300 people there. Several are historic, including scenes of the town and photos of a the boat "The Spray", Joshua Slocum's boat used for the first solo trip around the world that my great grandfather repaired for him. I have scanned these after carefully cleaning the glass side, but the main dirt left now is fungal growth in a few areas on the emulsion side. The negatives are archival-stored now.

The question: how can I safely clean (remove) the fungus? The emulsion is in relatively good shape.

Thanks for any help you can provide on this.

Howard

[dwross]

Howard,
The good news is that your plates are in decent shape. Unfortunately, I've never heard of a way to restore emulsion that has been etched by fungus. You can try gently wiping the emulsion with film cleaner on a very soft cloth. Don't try any solution with water, because fungus-attacked gelatin seems to be even more vulnerable to water damage than unaffected gelatin. 'Back in the days' there was a thriving industry for retouching prints made from damaged negatives. Today, with Photoshop it's a lot easier. If you don't want a digital print, you can make (or have made) a digital negative for contact printing on silver gelatin paper.

Good luck with this. You're very fortunate to have the old plates, and they are very fortunate to have come to live with someone who appreciates them.

d

Big Fish,
Thanks for the Aztek link. Very interesting.

[Big Fish]

Hi Howard....

From my research and experince I would not touch the emulsion sie of the glass plate with anything especially not a cleaning solution. I would consult a conservator for anything do you with emulsion. There are numerous sites avialble about restoration of glass plates. Google and if no luck contact me again I will send links to the ones I found. As an aside, Miami in 1906 would be interesting to see. I did allot of research on Carl Fisher who made Miami Beach "the City of Magic." He disn't arrive until 1909-1910.

[Noeyedear]

I have scanned hundreds of Glass negs, at the time I was using an Artixscan 1100. Emulsion down on the Glass draw and scanned Colour rgb 48bit, works a treat. Easier than modern emulsions.

Kevin.

[Big Fish]

Dear Noeyedear....

Your suggestion works very well. Emulsion on the platen, 48 Bit Color (only tried 48HDR color9 and scanned at 2.5. I also used Siverfast Ai and regular Epson Scan on the 750 Pro...very similar with Epson being easier to use. Thanks for the tip.

It is best to convert 8 bit or 16 greyscale bit to work on?

Best...

Big Fish